1(21)/2009 :

4 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
:
.

:
..
.. . .
: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

.. . ,
..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
..
.. -?
..
.. .. (). Silicon Valley
.. ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
..

..
..
.. . , !
.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40
..
. :
..
: .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61
..
..

Lynn Visson (USA). Is a Puzzlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74
..

..
:
.. . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80
105062, ,
., . 23, . 5 . . . . .3-
./: +7(495) 9166703
.: +7(495) 9796391
e-mail: rvalent@online.ru
rvalent@yandex.ru
www.rvalent.ru

ISBN 978-5-93439-245-2
16.03.09

800 .
_____

1

.
., 2009


(19202009 .)

23 2009
,
,
, , ,
, ,
.
,
, . ,

. , ,
,
.
, -
, , , .
,

, ,
,
.

- -
- , , -
( !), ,
. -
, .
1987 , , -
.
,
, -
. .. -
. , -
,
, , -
, ..
-
, -
, , ,
( ) -
, .
, ,
-
. . , -
.. -,
, . , , -
, . .
, ,
, -
, , , , -

. ,
() , -

, , , ,
, -
. , , -
. -
. .
,
,
, -, Patience et longueur du temps font plus que force ni
que rage . , -
! -
, ,
, , (sic!) -
, , , .

4

-

1 (21) 2009 ..
-
, -
,
-
, -


,

.
-
( , ),
-
. , , -
, , ,
: ) , ,
, ) ,
, ,
, -
--
,
-
. , , , -
, , , - -
, , .. .. ,
, ,
, .
( -
,
), -
, .
-, ,
,
. , ,
, , : (Thats all),
. , ,
Thats all, . --
, , , ,
Thats all, .
9- , -
( ), ,

( .. .. ), ,
! . , , , , ,
. ,
, ( !)
-
( ) , ,
.

5

, -
1 (21) 2009 ..

, , .
, , , ! , -
.
, -
, , , -
- , , , -
, ,
.

. .
1920 . 1941 , , -
. 1942
22 . . ( -
), (
). -

.
! ,
,
, ,
. ( ), , ,
,
. , -
!
,
, .
, . -
.. , , -
10 . , .
- . -
,
. . , , -
, .
-, , -
, -
, , .
, , -
.

6


, ,
. -
,
. ,
. -
, -.
.
, ,
: ... , , -
, , - -
. .
.
. -
, . , -
, (). -
, , ,
. ,
(!) , -
. ,
, , .
. ( , -
-
.) . ,
, . , , , . -
.
, , -

, , .
( 2007 87 ), . , .
, .
. 34. , ,
.
.
.
, . -
, .
-
, . - -
. , -
. , , ,
. -
, .
.
, , , , , , .
, , . -
. , , -
30- .

7


1 (21) 2009

.
. , -
. .
. , ,
-
, - .
, , .
. ,
, , -
. . ,
, . -
, . !
, .

- , , . ,
, ,
. . , -
. , -
, , .
, ! ,
.
, , . ,
. ,
: -
! , , -
. , , . ( -
) .
? -
? : -
- -
( ,
!) ,
. .
,
. . -
. ,
. , ...
. , -
, .
.
. . ,
- .
: , . -
,
. . !
.
, ,
.

8

. , 1957

1 (21) 2009

. .
, ,
,
.

. -
. ; -
, , . -
.
.
, , -
. 1955 . -
. -
. , ,
. , , ,
. , -
, .

. .
, .
. , -
. , ,
. .
, .
. 37, . .
. , .
:
. 1956 1975 .
. , , . -
. . ,
. , , -
, -
. . : -
, .
-
. , . ,
. -
, (!) . ,
. -
. : -
, . , ... .
.
, ,

9



-, 1960 ., - -
57 . . , -
, , . ,
, .
1996 , -
. .
, , , -
, -
. .
, ,
. .
, ,
.
. -
: .
-
. -
.
, -
: 1 -
, , , -
, .
--
, , -
, .
, . -
-:
, , .
-
. -
,
, -
. ,


, ,
, .

-
.
-
,
, , -
.
,

, Inside Russia. -

10


1 (21) 2009 .., ..

, -.
, .
. . -
. -
, ,
.
,
.
.

-.
..,
-, 30
.. ,
.. -

,
,

. , . -
, .
( !) ,
. -
: , , . -
, .

. , -
, -
: . !
, ,
, : -
. ! -
, , -
epe .

11

.
1 (21) 2009 ..

. ,
-
, -
192040- .,
,
. -

:
,
, . -
,
-
-
. 50 , -
, !
: , ,
, -
, -
. , -
. .
, , , -
-. -
.
,
.

,
, -
, .
.
1939 . -

, -
, :

, -
.
.
-
, .
:
,
! ,
,
-
.

12

: ,

1 (21) 2009 ..
.
. ,
:
;
; -
, , -
. :
. -
, , -
.
,
, , -
. -
. .
. : -
? ?

,
. -

-
-

, .
. ,
, ,
, - .
, -
. ,
, -
.

( ), .
.
:
(2003),
.
, , . -
.
-
-
.
2001 . , , ,
, -
, -
, 1986 . - -
-
, , ,
. .

13

,
1 (21) 2009 ..

-
,

. -
-
, , -
-,
-,
--
,
-
.
, ,
,
.
, .
, ,
.

,
.
, , -
, , , 1917
. , .
,
. .
,
, . -
, , .
,
1 ,

: , .
. . -
.
? . , -
, , . -
. . -
, !
. ,
. -
; , ,
. , -
. , :

14

, ! ,

1 (21) 2009 ..
. , -
: , , , ?.
- : 80! ,
, .
, ? , .
, , ,
. , .
, , ,
300 , - . -
, ,
, .
, ? :
. , -
. , . , -
- . , , ,
.
, ?
.
, ,
, . ,
, -
. -
, , -
. - ,
, . -
, , , - .
, , , -
... , - , , -
, ? ? . ? -
, , ,
. ? . , , !
, , , . ,
, , --
! , , .
-
23 .
, ,
. , -
. ,
. ,
. ( , ,
,
3, ,
).
, - ,
. , ,
. , , . , -
. .

15

- ,
1 (21) 2009 ..

- , .
, , -
.
* * *
, .. .
. -
, - , -
. , -
.
. , -
, . .
, ,
. , -
, .
, . , -
,
, , -
, , , . , ,
, .
, ,
, .
, -
: . ( -
- , , -
),
? , ,
. , -
, .
, , , , -
. . ,
: , ... , ... ... . , -
, , -
, : , , ? -
?. , : ,
, - . , .
, -
. - -
. , .
, , -
, .
. , ,
, : ,
. .
PS.
.
..

16


,
. , -
, .
, ,
, ,
, , -
, - ,
,
.
.
, ,
, , -
. -
.
, , ,
,
. , -
, !
,
.
-, , : -
. , -
, , .
-
. , , ,
. : ,
, . -
,
, , , , , ..
, , , .
,
. ,
, , -
. , . -
,
, , ,
, .
, ,
. -
90- . , ,
, -
.
, ,
.
. -

, ,
.

17

, , , , -
1 (21) 2009

. ,
-. .
, , -
. , -
: , , ,
, , . , , -
, . , ,
: , , ,
, , - .
, -
.
,

;

.
, ;
.

, .
. .
.
, , ;
.
.
.

, .


... , .
-.
, ,
. , , .
. : !
, , . .
. . :
. .
, -
. , , .
, , ... -
. , -
, ...
- . . ?
. . .
: ...
, 13

18


, 1968 . -
. : , , ,
, , .
.
, , ,
, .
, , , , -
. - .
: , !.
.
-
. ,
. , -
. : , -
- .
, . -

.
, , .
, ,
. ,
, . -
, .
-.
, , -
, , ,
. . , ,
, . ,
. -
, , .
.
, - -
.
1970- , -
, , . , -
. : ,
, , . -
, , ,
.
, ,
, , , .
, -
, .
: -
, , , , . -
.

(7- )

19


, ,
.
.
,
, .

.

.

, , ,
.
,
.
,
,
, .

, .
, .
, . ,

.
,
( ) ,
.
,
,

20


..

-:
, (
),
, ,
, - - .
- , - , -
, - --
, -
, , - . (reversing an entry)
, , , , .
. -
, - , -

. ,
c, ,
- , -
, , - -
, - . ,
, , -
, , .
. -
, . -
-
:
,
,
.
(
. ) -
, - . 31 -
.

21

- ,
1 (21) 2009 ..

. 90 - ,
, 91 99 -
. ( -
, .. , . -
, , , - -
http://www.gazeta-unp.ru/unp.pl? www.accountingcoach.com.
page=state&id=2640) , -
, explains accounting with amazing
- clarity. .
. , -
, -
( :
).
After the end of the year the income statement
31 accounts (revenue accounts and expense
accounts) will be closed or zeroed out and their
balances will be transferred into the Retained
Earnings account. This will mean the revenue and
90 91 - expense accounts will start the new year with zero
balances allowing the company "to keep score"
. ( for the new year.
, .. , -
, 2006, 3, -- Balances in the revenue and expense accounts
are zeroed out by closing/transferring/clearing
http://www.consultant.ru/law/consult/gk/gk2006 their balances to the Income Summary account.
0217/#art3678)
,
, ,
: . , , -
- , ,
, -
-
. ,
-
, , -
(), - . ,
, - -
. , -
, -. , -
, , ,
-
. , , -
.
, ottage.
: ,
,
to zero out revenue and expense accounts ,
to zero out income and expenditure accounts ottage
to zero out balances in revenue and expense , -
accounts .

22

A small house, esp. in the country; a small on. -

1 (21) 2009 ..
vacation house cottage ,
American Heritage Dictionary. -
, , Collins Cobuild . -
English Language Dictionary: a small house,
usually in the country. - .
, elite, de luxe luxury cottages -
,
, cottage
, , - . -
, small, nice, little, modest, .. , -
, - , -
- .
. Websters Concise College Dictionary -
cottage .
: a small house, usu. of ,
only one story. 2. a small modest vacation house,
at a lake or mountain resort. Collins Concise , -
Dictionary ottage a small , -
simple house, esp. in a rural area. ,
, - -
, - single- . -
family house/home, detached house ,
residence: single-family residence detached , transfer.
residence. , -
. inter-budget transfers. -
, , , ,
single-family residence construction, inter-budget transfer resolutions
- inter-
budget transfer requests. -
luxury village. , .
, , -
, (to provide, to grant, to allocate)
, luxury village - . , -
. - transfer , -
- .
to make: inter-budget transfers made from ...
subdivision, to ... . -
. , -
Random House Webster Dictionary - . ,
subdivision a portion of land divided into -
lots for real-estate development. , ,
. Oxford Advanced , forms of
Learners Dictionary - inter-budget transfers from the federal budget.
- -
(Am.E) one of the parts of an area of - . ,
land that has been divided up for building houses -

23

, , , -
1 (21) 2009 ..

, :
,
the legal ownership of something, esp. land or
. - property Collins Cobuild English Language
- . Dictionary;
535 -
( ) the legal right to own sth, esp. land or
. , property; the document that shows you have this
right Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary;
-
the formal right of ownership of property -
() - Blacks Law Dictionary;
a persons right of ownership of property -
, Oxford Dictionary
, of Law;

ownership Barron's
, , , Dictionary of Legal Terms.
. -
Barrons Dictionary of Real Estate Terms
.. .. ,
ontract of procurement. , , -
, , :
, evidence that the owner of land is in lawful
. - possession thereof; evidence of ownership.

-
, ,
-
, -
. -
. -
,
agricultural procurement
, Collins
contract.
Concise Dictionary, -
-
title:
-
. a. the legal right to possession of property, esp.
. - real property;
b. the basis of such right;
. - c. the documentary evidence of such right: title
, deeds.
title, - Title
. ownership, possession.
to possess
, . -
title to possess Blacks Law Dictionary
, - to own (, -
- , -
. ,
-
title , to possess, to hold).

24

, - -

1 (21) 2009 ..
, title, Collins Concise .
Dictionary title deed. Title deeds, - ,
Blacks, deeds which constitute or .
are the evidence of title to lands. deed, -
, , , -
: a conveyance of realty; a ..
writing signed by grantor whereby title to realty is (
transferred from one to another ( title, , -
, Blacks ) -
). , -
, .
- -
. , , -
- , ,
right ( ) title (- , ( , , -
) - ).
, , -
- ,
- , .
, -
-- : ,
, -
: ( .)

Vindicatio . Lat. the asserting of a right or title
in or to a thing (Blacks). .
, -
, - -
- , -
. - ,
, , -
. .
, , (
, , ).
, .
. , - www.arbitr.msk.ru.
, - -
. ..
, , .. (http://arbitr.msk.ru/
. article_2007_12_16_0241.php?number =305).
305 :
.
, - , , -
, : N. (-
),
? - , ,
. .. (. 301
, , - ) (. 304 ).

25

- ,
1 (21) 2009 ..

, : (1) (2)
, // .
, - : (1) right; title (=right
- -
, of ownership) (2) legal basis, legal grounds.
,
, . title,
() , ,
. - . ,
(. 265 ), entitlement, to be entitled =
(. 294 ), -
(. 296 ). - to have a right to sth, title -
. ,
(. 216 ), - , title.
(- ()
) (. 338 ), , - , -
: (. 34 ), title: title examination,
(. 35 ), - title search, , -
(. 36 ), (. 40 ), -
(. 47 ), - , -
(. 53 ) .. .
(..
: ) legal
- possessor/holder,
. , entitled possessor.
, - www.businessdictionary.com

, legal possessor:
.
, . . . Legal entity that has the legal right to possess a
- property while another entity (the legal owner)
, , , retains its title.
, -
- legal owner legal
. (http://arbitr. possessor . -
msk.ru/upload/knigi/article_2007_07_ , legal owner legal possessor c-
18_0014.html) , ,
, ()
- -
: , , ,
-
.
, -
. - .
. - , -
( :
),
, -
. (, , -
. ,
-
( ). , , -
. ,

26

. , ,

1 (21) 2009 ..
, - -
: , ( . novatio -
, , , - , ). -
, . ,
- , novation, -
, -
:1 , , .
. -
17 1998 . N 976- . -
, 414 -
.

- , -
, - , -
,
, -
:
.
1.
-
: Barrons Dictionary of Legal Terms
. novation :
2.
, : Substitution of another party for one of the
original parties to a contract, with the consent of
2.1. , - the remaining party. The old contract is then
; extinguished, and a new contract, with the same
2.2. content but with at least one different party, is
; created.
2.3. -
;
. ,
2.4. -
.
,
-
3. , -
: .
;
-
; (
), (
, - ). -
, . ( )
.
1 Oxford Dictionary of Law -
, : - novation,
-
. :
constructed facility. ,
, , - the substitution of a new contract for one
, already existing.
, .
. Barrons Dicitionary of Real Estate Terms
, territory not novation , -
subject to development area not subject to development. :
, -
.

27

1. a 3-party agreement whereby one party is , -
1 (21) 2009 ..

released from a contract and another party is

substituted. ().
2. substitution of one contract for another, with -
acceptance by all parties.
:
novation
- An obligation is terminated by an agreement of
the parties on the replacement of the initial
, - obligation existing between them by another
, - obligation between the same persons providing for
. another subject or another means of performance
- (a substitution).
novation (agreement of novation) , -
, Blacks: -
A type of substituted contract that has the effect , -
of adding a party, either as obligor (debtor) or , , : agreement
obligee (creditor), who was not a party to the on replacement of obligation agreement on
original duty. Substitution of a new contract, debt, substitution of obligation. -
or obligation for an existing one, between the same
or different parties. The substitution by mutual
agreement of one debtor for another or of one , -
creditor for another, whereby the old debt is novation,
extinguished. A novation substitutes a new party , ,
and discharges one of the original parties to a .
contract by agreement of all parties. , -
,
, - .
,
, - novation .
,
, - , -
, novation, -
. , novation. -
, novation novation
, , , -
, , -
, - . -
.
. ,
. - novation
,
414 - . -
Termination ? , , .
of an Obligation by a Substitution. :
: , ,
(
-
-
, , ,

28

(-

1 (21) 2009 ..
, , ). )
- ()
, -
. -
- -
. -
, - ,
, , ,
, -
- (-) .. -
novation
substitute, substituted, substitution. - ( , trademark
,
, , ), -
-, -
. , franchiser franchisee
-
- ,
.
, - - -
- .
. - ,
road show, -
, , , .
, -. ,
- -. -
, ,
- . -
. (
. , -
) - , -
, . ,
, - , -
franchise agreement, , -
, -
, .
, -
,
-
,
.
, -

, -
.

29


,





..

- growth rate?
, , -
, .
- growth rate ( -
- ). C-
,
: -
- ,
. , 100%! ,
, .
- , -
, -
, - , ,
- , -
. : X=Y1/Y0,
, Y1,Y0
, - . -
. ,
: 120 , 80, -
growth rate 1,5.
, 100% (
, , -, - 150%).
; - 1
operating , , 100 % (
, 50%).
-
; , (Oxford Dictionary of Business and
, fixed Management) growth rate
assets , amount of change over a period in some of the
, financial characteristics (
-
. ...).

30

, - )

1 (21) 2009 ..
50% rise, spike, surge .
.
Operating ? -
, ,


growth rate . -
.
- -
- . -
- (The Anderson , -
School at UCLA), growth ratio is the ratio of operating revenues, operating
ending quantity to the beginning quantity ( - expenses, operating profit,
120/80 = 1,5 -
). - ,
, growth rate is the growth ratio less one; -
, , , (, , ).
growth rate = 1,51= 0,5 50% .
9/99
, , . ,
, growth ratio 6 1999 . 32. ( -
, a growth rate . - 18.09.2006), -
, : -
,
1, ( -
100%. . -
- , -
).
,
, operating? -
,
, , : operating
, -
a 7.1% increase in
-
grew 28.2% y-o-y
.
rose 13%
(Multitran) -
a 6.5 % rise in
, operating
- revenue -
- , -
, - : operating expenses

, : , -
: spike, jump, surge, -
leap, rally
.
, -
1 100% ( -

31

9/99 (. 7): operating
1 (21) 2009 ..

, - , -

, - , , -
, , -
, .
? ,
; - . , -
( - , operating
); revenue, on-line
- www. answers.com:
, -
Operating revenue means net sales plus other
. - regular income sources related to the normal
business operations of the entity (e.g., lease income
, if a major activity).
, -
, - , -
- ( , , -
5
).
9/99
. ,
operating?
- operating
,
(International Accounting Terms -
Dictionary) : ( ,
-
Operating describing expenses and revenue ), , .
associated with a companys main line of business.
9/99 . 5,
, , , -
.
, , -
- operating , :
revenue . Operating 1) -
(
. )
, - ;

(Oxford Dictionary of Business and 2) , -
Management) operating , -
profit/loss: -
;
Operating profit/loss profit or loss made by a 3)
company as a result of its principal trading activity.
,
, -
(1, 2, 3)
. -
, -
().

32

( - Non-operating describing expenses and

1 (21) 2009 ..
- revenues resulting from activities that are only
) incidental to a companys main line of business.
, , -
, -
. .
(1)
,
operating revenues, - , -
.
, - YourDictionary.com:
, - Non-operating revenues- revenues that are not
. . derived from a companys operating activities.
www.ecsocman.edu.ru: These may include revenues from investments, such
as dividends earned on stock held in other
perating revenue - companies, or income from notes or credit
, ( , - extended to customers.
- , -
, , .
). , -
,

.
operating revenues -
-
, . , -
-
, .5 10/99

. - , -

operating expenses, .
www.answers.com - , -
a category of expenditure that a (non-operating revenues -
business incurs as a result of performing its ) .
normal business operations ( , -
fixed assets?
-
). -
, - -
fixed assets -
(- ,
-
, - .
), , -
non-operating revenues and expenses. (fixed assets) -
- ,

(International Accounting Terms , , -
Dictionary) : , , fixed assets
,

33

- Statements),
1 (21) 2009 ..

- 2238/2004 29 -
- 2004 , ,
.
- - -
non-current (This Standard uses the term
, - non-current to include tangible, intangible and
-, financial assets of a long-term nature).
Fixed assets, non-current
- .
. ,
, - , , -
www.ofm.wa.gov -
. fixed assets capital
fixed assets, :
assets , -
Fixed assets refer to the capital assets

. .19 - Capital assets assets that meet the states
capitalization policy such as land, improvements
to land, easements, buildings, leasehold
4/99 , - improvements, vehicles, machinery, equipment,
- works of art and historical treasures, infrastructure,
and all other tangible or intangible assets that
() are used in state operations and that have initial
useful lives extending beyond one year.
. .20
( .
, ;
, .
, -
,
(- , , -
) (). , , ,
, ,
(Oxford , , ,
, -
Dictionary of Business and Management) -
- ,
fixed assets:
).
Fixed asset an asset of business intended for
continuing use, rather than a short-term current , fixed assets
asset. -
- , -
, - : non-current assets capital assets.
. :
, fixed assets - ,
. , -
1 - , -
- ., ?
(International
Accounting Standard 1 Presentation of Financial (Oxford

34

Dictionary of Business and Management), equipment - -

1 (21) 2009 ..
- 16
: (International accounting standard
16 Property, Plant and Equipment).
Fixed assets must be classified in a companys ,
balance sheet as intangible, tangible, or
. 5 6/01 ,
investment.
-
-
-
:
, . : ,
, ,
, -
, -
tangible fixed assets. , , , -
C ,
- , , -
( ) , , , -
, , - -
(Examples of .
tangible fixed assets include land and buildings, , -
plant and machinery, fixtures and fittings). -
, tangible fixed assets Property, plant
, .. Property, plant and and equipment.

..
:

(1973 .),
(1988 .) (1967 .)
, ,
- - (1977 .), -
. - , (1864 1883 .).
, -
, , : -
- (1929 .), -
, -
. - (1940 .), (1955 . ),
- -
, (1987 .).


, ,
. - (1946 .),
-
. , -
: (1976 .).
-
, , , - . . 60
, ,

35
 -?

Silicon Valley
?
.. ()

, ...:
Learn to see things as they really are, not as you imagine they are.
.. *

Silicon Valley ( , -
) 1971 . , , -
. (. , 1 700 000 , ,
, , 19.10.2000). . silicon

, ,
( - .
Electronics, silicone, -
1930 1995 .), - silicon,
. , ( -
. 88 - ), ,
: ... ... - , -
, -
.
- (
) [1]. .
[2, 3]. :
(
-, - For many years in the 1970s and 1980s it was
also incorrectly called Silicone Valley, mostly by
) journalists, before the name became commonplace
- in American culture. Unfamiliar with silicon, writers
, - assumed that it was a misspelling of silicone, a
- material used in caulking, breast implants, and
, , other products that had recently been introduced to
the public. 1970- 1980-
.., ,
, , , -
[4]. (. [ ] -
silicon) 14 .
.. - ,
-.
* .. . .. -
1980- 1990- .
, 4(20)/2008)

36
 -?
, - -

1 (21) 2009 ..
, , (
, , ,
, , . .). -
. ( . . .) -
( -
- silicon
. , - silicone , , -
, , - ).
.
-
, - -
30 . .
Silicon Valley ,
- .
: [57]. -
- :
:
(. Silicon Valley, -
Silicon Valley )
, ()...
( , ; ,

) [8]. . -
Silicon Valley (- .
) -
. -, .
- -
, silicon silicone
... [9]. . -
(. Silicone Valley)
, - - ( -
).
. , , -
Silicon Glenn , , .
..., 7080 . -
. ?
... (. Silicon Valley); http://
Silicon Prairie , - ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/: _-
. ..., - /22__2008.
;

Silicon Valley /
, . -...,
- ,
, [10]. .
, -

:

, , -
22 2008 . -
. .

22 2008 .: :
(. Silicon Valley) (. Silicon Valley, -
, , )

37
 -?
, 2. Silicone Valley
1 (21) 2009 ..

Cleavage canyon, the area on the chest between

. - the tits.
Thats a boob job, just look at the silicone valley.
, , -
, ? - 3. silicone valley
a girl who had a major and obvious boob job.
. OMG Angela is so fake! Look at her new silicone
. , valley!
? -
: -
.. , - Silicon Valley
. , Silicone Valley, -
- ? --
, . ?
- , -
, , - .
Silicon Valley Silicone Valley. , -
, ,
. -
? ,
- , -
- [11]: .
The Valley became the pioneering region for
producing adult films in the 1970s and since then
has been home to a multi-billion dollar pornography .
industry earning the monikers Porn Valley, San .
Pornando Valley or Silicone Valley (a play on :
Silicon Valley and silicone breast implants).
Silicone Valley - (. Silicon Valley,
: -
) ()...
-. ., , -
: -
-
http://siliconvalley.citysearch.com/profile/32534523/ .
san_jose_ca/silicone_valley_surgery_center.html -
Silicone Valley Surgery Center . -
3190 S Bascom Ave Ste 140 11 1971 -
(. Don Hoefler),
San Jose, CA 95124
Phone: (408) 879-1820 [1].
http://www.allwords.com/word-Silicone+ Valley.html
-
Silicone Valley silicon
proper noun silicone .
(
1. An erroneous, archaic form of Silicon Valley (see . Silicone Valley)
w: Silicon Valley, the Wikipedia article on Silicon - (
Valley). ).
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php? .
term=silicone+valley ( ):
1. silicone valley
the area between two breast implants. -
: -
Look at that chicks ugly tattoo in her silicone valley!

38
 -?
. -

1 (21) 2009 ..
, , - /-
. -
- - .
( * * *
, , ,
, - : -
- -
) , -

. - Silicon Valley, -
-
- , -
, , .
- -
. .
, , -
, ,
, -
. Silicon - ?
.
,
( ,
1. : , , . .
) - . . .-. . . .
-, - .: , 1980.
. , 2. . :
, - . .: , 1988.
. 3. . . . . .
. . .: , , 2004.
* * *
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Valley
2008 . 2009 . -
www. multitran.ru 5. - -
, .
www.proz.com 1998-2006 ., .. , .. . 13,8
. .
Silicon Valley. 6. - -
- 1. 81 . .
17 , - 7. - -
7 7 . , 2005, .. 100 . -
7 . .
. 8. - . ABBYY
, Software, 2008. 100 . : . 9- ., . .
- . 9. -
-II. .
, .. . .. ,
- .. , .. , .. , .. -
, , .. , .. , .. ;
2005. 21 . .
10. . .
, . . .: , 2007.
- 11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Fernando_Valley
:
1 - .

, - , 2003, .. . 76 . .

39


, !

..

, !
, ! ,
,
(
. . )

- --H--!
, .
(. . -, )

-
- .
. -
, :
, . ; -
- ; ; -
. - ;
: ; -
- ; -
- ; ,
, ; -
. ; , -

.
. -

, -
,
,
, -

(.. , ,
.. ) , - . -
,
, - .. :
(.. , .. -
) [. : 3. . 37, 39].

40

. -,

1 (21) 2009 ..
, ,
. -
, -
[20. . 6]. , -
-
, , -
: Methode de traduction (,
:
,
-
, a methodology for
... translation, -
, -
[5. . 21]. ,
, , ,
, - ).
- ,
. , -
- - () ,
. - , -
- -
(.. , .. ,
.. .). ,
. -
, , -
- , -
- .
. , , , -
- - ,
.
, ? -
, - - -
? . -
, ( )
, . -
.
-
( -
) - 37 ,
lacune, - c -
1950- , -
1960- - -
.-. . [26] ,
. [25]. - : -
, - .
, lacunology
. - , -
, : -
, -

41

() . - .. -
1 (21) 2009 ..

.
, -
(, -
), - .. ,

- 1953 .,
-
lacunaology. .
, ,
. , 1968 .
- -
,
.. - - -
.. . - . , -
. - , -
, , , ,
[17. . 184]. (-
.. , -
: ,



-
[22. . 135].
). ,

lacune
-
, .
..
. -

, - . , .. -
( ) ,
( - ,
)
[2. . 95]. , .
, , -
.. . , -
, -
.. - , ,
, , , .. . -
- ,
: twenty-four hours XVIII XIX
(24 ), day and night ( ,
). , absurdite, inertie, emble`me, objet,
, , - enthousiasme, periode, geste, liberalite,
, administratif, attribution.
, -
, , ..
glimpse, floorer, exposure ( , , -
. , -
). ( ,

42

- -

1 (21) 2009 ..
) ,
Gesetzmigkeit, (, - ,
, ) - , , .
- .. , -
. -
(, , [10], -
) - , .
, .. -
. - ( )
, .. .
. , -
.. - , -
- , ,
[18], ,
, , -
, -
(mount, resentment, ruthless, -
wanton), - .
. - conservationist, baby-sitter,
backlog, etc. [11. . 148].
[19]
, .. , -
. .
eye- , -
opener -, -
,
( .. ), outdoorsman -
-
( . ,
.. ). , ,
- , ,
- -
. , , -
, , .
-
- ..
, [23],
, ,
[19. . 24]. .
, .. - -
, . -
.. , , -
, spender,
. , - destroyer (of jobs), union-basher -
, - -. ,

43

-
1 (21) 2009 ..

. .
, .. - -
, - -
- , -
.
, , [6] -
[24], --
.
-
. -
- ()
, .
. (
, ),
. ,
,
, . -
, - : ,
- -
: ;
, , -

- [6. . 43]. , -
, - , , .
- .
:
-
- , -
- , .
, .. . ,

inferiority superiority,
, .. 50-
[24. . 126]. 70- . .. -
(, .. -
, - , ( -
inferiority , -
.) ) -
.. . . .
.. ,
-
. , .. ,
- .
, () .. , .. .. -
, - ,
-
. - ,
. .

44

-, - , -

1 (21) 2009 ..
- , - ,
. .


70- ? -
- -
. ,
- .
- ,
, .. --
[15], .. [6], .. -
.. [12], .. [8], . -
.. [3], ,
, -, ,
- (-
, , -

, - ), -,
(, -
.. , . ) , -,
- -
, 70- , , --
( , (, ) ..
.. )
. -
, - , -
, .
, -
- -
. , .
. ,
, - -
- , -
, - , (-
, ), ()

(, - [9. . 32]. -
), - -
- , -
. , -
, , .
- -
. , -
-
, -
. , .

45


1 (21) 2009 ..

. -
() ? (.. , .. -
? ), (.. -
, ).
( - , -
), - -
-
, -
, - -
,
. - ,
- -
.
- ,
. , -
, - :
-
- ,
, -
- ,
. [5. . 22]. ,
- .
, -
, , -
, - ,
. ,
-
- ? , -
.
,
, - ,
. -
. .

, , -
, - ,
, - . -
( ) , -

- , -
. - . ,
, - -,
, , -
, .
. -
,

46

. -

1 (21) 2009 ..
( ( )1.
-
, ) - , -
-
, , , : -
,
. , -
- , -

, -
- (). ,
, -
( () -
, , - , , -
, , - ,
, [5]). .

, , .. -
-
(. - -
). .
, - -
- -

- , -
. -
.
-
() (). - -
- . ,
-
(), - -
- , -
, . ,
. .. ,
[3], -
- -
, ;
, - -
:
-
[13. . 33].
- , -
, - .. .
- -
. , -

47

- , -
1 (21) 2009 ..

. .
.. , - ,
- (-
, : = , )
- [6. . 56].
, ,
[3. . 33]. -
, - ,
, -
- . -
( ). -
, . ,

, - -
.
- ( -
() , ).
, , -
- . , -
(- , ,
,
.. [21]). -
- .
- , -
. -
, , ,
(- -, ,
)
. ,
[15. . 111].
: . .. -
() , -
, - , -
, -
, -

(, ()
, ) ,
, ,
. . , -
( - ,
), .
( - ,
) [6. . 55]. , -
, , . -
show , -

48

, ,

1 (21) 2009 ..
- ,
, , , (, -
. , , .).
, , ,
TV show () - ,
, ,
, , ,
.
- ( , , -
radio
show (): - ).
, ,
, , -
( )
. , ,
- .

- , -
, .. ,
-
show, . [20. . 5].
, , -
- ,
. ,
.. - -
amarantowy - -
, - ( -
( ).
- , -
, , , , ,
, (
) [20. . 4]. ) -
-, , - .
, -
, , , -
. ,
, -
, , - ,
, -
- -
, , . , .
- -
amarantowy -
(). - .
, -
--

49

.. : - You need your rest. You havent slept in over a
1 (21) 2009 ..

day.
. .
- ,
- -
, 2. ,
[24. . 126]. day
, - , : ,
- ,
- ,
, ,
: 1) .
; 2) -
- day
; 3) He
; 4) stayed there for three days. -
; 5) . (, )
, , night
, . ():
- reserve a room for three nights. ,
. - -
, - ,
. ,
.
- , .. -
.. , ,
,
, - . -
, -, - 24 hours day and night
, ( , -
) - ? ,
. . ,
- ,
. twenty-four hours
-
( - , -
) . , -
- ,
. ,
? .
, - -
,
day. - ,
, , -
day 24 . . -
, day twenty-four by
:

50

seven, 24/7 ( -

1 (21) 2009 ..
, ,
). Sicherheitspersonal -
, Ballonflug
: , Neujahrsmorgen 3.
- , -
? , -
, -
, , -
- .
- -
. , , - . ,
: ,
- , ,
,
.. , - , ,
- -
,
, -
(- .
, , -
- , : -
, , ? , ,
). , -
: -
- .
not unimportant, :
of no little importance/consequence. - -
, . The government sought and obtained a
? - restraining order.
, - , -
. ,
. -
, - ,
( - - , -
) - -
important (). , . -
of no little , ,
importance , ? -
, - -
, , - ,
. ? .
- , -
. - , -
, , par excellence,
- ,

51

(.. [16], , -
1 (21) 2009 ..

.. [24]). : -
, - .
-
.

- (, --
-, -, -, -, -, - (- ) .
, , , , . . ,
, ), (
- (, - ) -
), (, - .
, ). -
, -
- -
. - (
- , -
.
- ).
, - , -
, -
, .
.
.. : , -
? ? , - () ,
, - --
. .. -
- , , -
. , ,
, - .
,
, ,
(: Scalability is a desirable property of a .
system
). - .

- , .
- -
, - ,
, . -
. ,
-
() . -
, . , , rat
() -
,

52

, - -

1 (21) 2009 ..
, , , , . -
, . - -
,
, - , -
-
- - ,
[3. . 211212]. -. , -
, , , -
. -
, gang, .
- , ,
2000 .
, .. - .
, , :
. -

: , .
. . (
- )
(the goats are under us) , -
- .
goat -
, . -
(, -
. ).
, - -
- - -
, ,
.
, - ( ). -
, - ,
- -
( ). , , .
,
-
, : 1) -
. ( )
-
, 4. - ; 2)
- par excellence, ..
-
. - ;
Hi, gang! : 3)
, !. .
, -
- ,
: .
. : , !. . ,

53

, -
1 (21) 2009 ..

, - -
-
, .
- .. -
. ,

() 28
, 2009 .:
-
,
. ,
.. -
.
,
70- - , -
, ,
. , -
-
, - - .
,
- , -
. . -
, -
,
, - (illusions magicians)
.
.
,
. .
-

. ..
.. [1] - We must not harbour any illusions while
assessing the state of the global economy and the
real corporate standing, even if such assessments
.. : , , - are made by major auditors and analysts.
,
, -
(, ,
) , - ,

, (assessing
- assessment).
. -
( ,
-
)
. , -

54

. ( , --

1 (21) 2009 ..
, -
, , - -

, , , -
). . -
, ,
, -
. - -
- -
,
(), .
, -
, .. ,
().
. .
( ) -
, - :
- The following conventions shall be used in this
. , Agreement, unless there are direct indications to the
- contrary following from the context: (a) references to
articles and paragraphs are references to the articles
per se, - and paragraphs of this Agreement; (b) references to
- the Parties are references to the Lender and the
, Company.
.
convention . -

(, , ,
( ). , , , -
, - , , ).
, - -
, -
. , , -
. ,
,
; -
, () .
. - , convention -
- ,
- -
:
.. : ,
: () -
- -
; () -
.
-
[2. . 97].

55

-
1 (21) 2009 ..

,
()

. , -
, - .
, - , -, -
. - , -
-, (
, , -
)
, -
, - . -
-. - ,
, - -
.
- , -
-
,
.
convention , -

, -
, -
. -

:
.
This document defines the procedure by which
( , particular formats, called profiles, can be defined and
- registered, and the conventions such formats must
) follow.
. , - ,
, -
-



-, -
. -
. -
,
, -
-
,
, .
, : -
, -, - -
, -
- , -
.
- ,
( ). :
, -
- - ,
, -
. - , .
,
( ) -

.

56

. , , :

1 (21) 2009 ..
nevermore
? , , -
- - ,
- -
. .
:
. , , -
-
, - -
(- . ,
-, , - -
). .
, - -
, - , , -
Nevermore! - ,
. , -
-
, .
( , , - -
, ), -
. ( ,
.. , -
, Nevermore! --
).
- -
, :

grandson granddaughter grandchildren

son daughter children

brother sister siblings

father mother parents

grandfather () grandmother grandparents

57

- ,
1 (21) 2009 ..

(,
( - ) .
) -
- , inferiority -
: , , ,
.
, , , -
grandparents .
, - -
. , -
- (, -
: , , -
, . , : inferiority of our troops -
, - ).
- , -
- , -
. grandparents , -
. ,
- -
. , -
- . -
,
. -
- - .
-
, -
. copy, cut, paste. -
-
. - : -
, , .
. paste.
inferiority, -
.. : ()
. -
superior inferior
.

be superior be inferior , -
, ,

superiority inferiority insert,
(, ).
,
, - , -
inferiority, - . -
: - ,

58

, : - ,

1 (21) 2009 ..
-, - ,
- .
, , -
- --
, -
. -
-
, , , .
.
P.S. --
, , -
summary,
,
executive summary. -



executive - -
:
. ,
(
), -
-
, ,
- . :
http://ermolovich-di.ucoz.ru
1 ,
, -
, . ., , [14].
2 (Ethan Mao), -
.
(Quentin Lee), 2004 .
3

.. .
. , 4 , . ,
- . , . , 2008 .


.
1. . . -
//
. ., 1984. . 311.
. .. , 2. .. . ., 1975.
, 3. ..
. . ., 2007.
, - 4. .. -
. , 2003.
5. .., .. -
, . : ? //
- . , 2003. . 2027.
. - 6. ..
( ). ., 2001.
, 7. ., . -
- . ., 1976; 2- ., 1980; 3- ., 2006. -
, 3-
.
, -
8. .. : .
- . ., 2004.

59

9. .. - 19. ..
1 (21) 2009 ..

. // . - . ., 1978.
, 2003. 20. .. : -
10. .. . ., // . ,
1975. 2003.
11. .. (- 21. .. .
). ., 1990. http://sternin.adeptis.ru/articles2_rus.html [-
12. .., .. : , ], 2007.
. ., 2003. 22. ..
13. .. ( ). . 4-. ., 1983.
- 23. .. . .,
: . . . . ., 1982. 1973.
14. .. . 24. .. : , -
., 2000. , . ., 1988.
15. - .. - 25. Malblanc A. Stylistique compare du franais et
. ., 1996. de lallemand. Paris, 1961.
16. .. ( - 26. Vinay J. P., Darbelnet J. Stylistique compare du
). franais et de langlais. Mthode de traduction. Paris,
, 1975. 1958; . : J. Vinay, J. Darbelnet. Comparative
17. .., .. - Stylistics of French and English. / Trans. and ed. by Juan C.
. ., 1964. Sager and M.-J. Hamel. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 1995.
18. ..
. ., 1974; 2- ., 2004. -
2- .

. 35
:
()

, - , -
. - :
, - , -
. 1905 .,
. - (.: -
- , 1980).
.
.
, ,
. ,
.
, ,
, - -
, :
.. . // . -
. 2007. 4(16). .41-48. ,
- , , --
. , .
..

60


..

- Bill Gates gets 4 million emails a day

- The next time youre sifting through the mortgage
- offers, cheap Rolex watches or dubious business
proposals from Nigeria, spare a thought for Bill Gates.
. - The Microsoft founder is the most spammed man in the
world, with 4m emails arriving in his inbox each day.
Steve Ballmer, Microsofts chief executive, told a
, III
conference in Singapore that being the worlds best-
2009 . known software billionaire has its downside: Bill
, receives 4m pieces of email per day, most of it spam.
, - The upside of the Microsoft founders bulging
inbox is that it appears to have focused his mind on the
- problem.
, - Spam is regarded as perhaps the biggest threat to
the internet, with some experts putting it as high as
-
80% of the world's online traffic.
. The company is working on a number of
- solutions, including software that replies automatically
: to email messages from users not known to that
- computer. Microsoft is also working with internet
, 6070- - firms AOL, Yahoo and EarthLink to verify the identity
.. - of the sender of an email message.
A North Carolina man who raked in $24m (13m)
1. , ,
from peddling junk products and pornography under a
, - false name this month became the first felony
, , conviction under a United States anti-spam law, and
, - faces up to nine years in prison.
- Unlike ordinary people though, Mr Gates doesnt
- get a sore finger from deleting unwanted missives. The
. company has a team of people dedicated to ensuring he
, , - only gets mail that he wants to read. (The Guardian,
November 19, 2004)

(, , -
,
), .
:
1 ., , .. . III , -
// . ., 1974. -
c. 3140.

61

, - -
1 (21) 2009 ..

. , - - ;
, , bulging inbox -
; - , ,
, ,
, ,
bulging inbox -
.

Microsoft is also working with internet firms
. (1468 AOL, Yahoo and EarthLink to verify the
) identity of the sender of an email message
. - , -
- :
- -
( , ,

, - ; -
,
, -

). .
, -
, A North
, , Carolina man, , -
, , ,
, - -
- .
. , - Mr Gates doesnt get a sore finger from
, deleting unwanted missives -
. : :
The next time youre sifting through the
mortgage offers, cheap Rolex watches or , -
dubious business proposals from Nigeria - -
, , , , -

; - -
, - .
, -
. , ,
the most spammed man in the world - , -
. -
.

being the worlds best-known software , -
billionaire has its downside
: -, -
software billionaire, .
-
, , ,
, -, .
being
. 1-
The upside of the Microsoft founders bulging ,
inbox is that it appears to have focused his .
mind on the problem ,
: -

62

( -

1 (21) 2009 ..
) to sift through - , -
, - .
-
. :
, -
- -
, : , ,
-
2
:
, -
,
-
, -
, - :
- -
. ,
,
, :
- -

- ( ).

-
( -


( -
-
, -
.)
).
, -
,
-
-
,
( ).
-

2-
-
. - -
(Steve Ballmer, Microsofts
, - chief executive, told a conference in
, - Singapore) -
- - .
-
, 3. /
: -
- ,
4 .
3
.
. ,
-
Microsoft - . -
,
Ballmer (()/
()) , -
2 -
,
. - , [(:)] [(:)] -
, .
.

63


4. , ,
1 (21) 2009 ..

, - -
, );
, -
-
-
, ( -
, - :
- ,
, -
: , - ).
- software
, - .
, ,
: - :
, -
- ,
,
being the worlds best-known ,
software billionaire has its downside, .
, - software -
. software (,
billionaire - hardware), ,
, -
, , -
: .
, -
, , -
( , ,
);
. , -
, , -
, -
( - .
, - being
.
); - -
, -
, -
downside:
( -

-
;
);
-

( -
- );
(
-
(
4 Chief
:
,
Executive Officer . .. . -
. .: . , 2002. . 162163.
, ,
).

64


1 (21) 2009 ..
-
.
, , -
:
-

-

3-

. -
-
-

- -
: ,
,
- -
, -
. ,
- , -
Microsoft , . ,
, :
. ,
-
, , , -
: : ,

, . (- -
- ;
,
. .)

- 4-
-
. - .
-- -
, - : Spam is
. , regarded as perhaps the biggest threat to the
, , internet -
. - , -
( , - perhaps. ,
- ,
, - -
), perhaps, possibly, arguably, one/some of (the
best, the most, etc.) -
. ,

65

- ,
1 (21) 2009 ..

. , -
- . -
, , , -
, - ,
. . -

5- , -
, - , :
-
, - AOL, Yahoo EarthLink
: , -
The company is working on a number of .
solutions. - -
: - - AOL, Yahoo
, Earthlink -
-
:
. (, -
,
80%
. / .)
-
. ( - 6-
? ?)
, -
, ,
, -
. .
. rake in,
, , Longman Dictionary of Contemporary
to work English (LDCE) infml
with somebody to do something (informal) -
: - () -
(). -
, , ,
-

.
( , -
-
). -
-, AOL,
Yahoo Earthlink, , - , rake
- in , -
. (, , ,
(),
, (rake =
: - ).
- . -
- ,
, -
-
.
.)
, -

66

- , -

1 (21) 2009 ..
: junk . ,
, , junk products -
24 . , -
(
, -
junk food
24
(, ), junk mail (
, , ), junk bond
24 (
- ) -
, - ,
-
, , - ).
. , , junk , -
, , ?
, -
( : ,
) - , . -
( ,
)5. - . -
, (
- junk products)
,
rake in. - , -
( - , , -
), : ,
. -
, -
junk -
products . ,
junk, -
: 1. 1) , , - : - ,
2. 1) , 3. . -
, . . , - ,
junk products
, , , -
. - .
, rake in ,
, , -
-
, junk - .
LDCE , , ,
. (sl.) .
,
: , , -
. -
5 . .. : 24 -
[
: . . . . .
., 2008. (http://www.thinkaloud.ru/sciencesya.html)

67

], - ,
1 (21) 2009 ..

.
-
-
. -
, junk products,
, -
(, ,
, -
). - . ,
, , -
, - -
: 24 , -
, . :
. A North Carolina man -
,
. - ,
. -
.
- , -
faces up to nine years in prison -
. - .
, - , (-
, who)
. - , -
, , . -
: ,
conviction (), ,
. - . -
, :
- ,
, . 24 . . (13 . -
), -

,
,
. ,
, - , -
9 .
anti-spam law.
-
:
, -
, -
- ( - , ,
-?) -
: , 6. -
- 6 faces up to

- nine years in prison , conviction

()
: - . , conviction -
( , , ,
), : , .

68

- 24 , -

1 (21) 2009 ..
.
.
, : -
.

- 7-
.
, -
- ,
. - , , -
9 . Mr Gates doesnt get
a sore finger from deleting unwanted missives.
, , , ,
- ,
, - , ,
. -
, , . ,
, , -
. ,
: ,
.
9 - , -
,
24 000 000$ (13 000 000), -

:

, - ,
. . ( ,
, -
- - -
,
. , .)
, - ,
, , ,
. . (
, , - , -
, : -
, . - -
-
: , (, , ), -
() -

-
. .)
-
, , -

, -
, : .
( -
(
- -, -
. - -, ?)
, , -

69

( -
1 (21) 2009 ..

.) -
, .)
- , , -
. , -
, ,
.
. , ,
, -
-
- , -
- ,
. :
, ,
, , -
, - .
. , , -
doesnt get a sore finger -
: , .
, , ,
. - -
.
. - ,
,
- .
:
, - , -
, - , -
: ,
. ( -
. .
,
Mr ,
( Miss, Mrs Ms -
) - -
, , -
, .
- ,
, .
-- ,

, -
- , -
-
, ,
.) . -
, ,
,
, ,
. ( -

, -
- ): ,
, . , -

70

, -

1 (21) 2009 ..
.
, , . -
.

? -
, -
-

,

:
-
-
8.
,
, -
, -

,
-
-
-
. : ,
. -
, ?

: -
-
, , ,
. --
, ? ,
, , -
?
,
, , -
, , ,
-
, -
, -
: -
. ,
. -
, -


:
.

-
, AOL,
-.
Yahoo EarthLink , -
, .. ..
, -

. ,
, -
,
-
, -
, -
-
7.
, .
-
, ,
. .. -
,
:

-
,

, -
,
. .,

. -
,
, , -
, . .
,
-
-
,
7 .. , .. . - 8 .. . :

. .: - . .: .,
. , 1978. . 1617. 2005. . 287.

71

. -
1 (21) 2009 ..

( ) -
: ,

-
-
. ,
-
Microsoft ,
, -
,
EarthLink? ,

, ,
-
.
, Girard-Perregaux
-, --
, BVLGARI ( -
, ) -
, ,
Lamborghini - , . , -
? , , Lada
- Fanta .
: Nike, - -
, ,
- .

, - , -
. -
,
- .
. , -
-
- , -
- (
),
. .
, ,
-
, .
. * * *
-

. , -
- -
, ,
-
. -


. -
. -

72

, -

1 (21) 2009 ..
.
( .. -
, - ,
, : ,
- ). , ,
. - -

, - ,
, , ,
,
.
. ,
, .
( - ,
) , -
, - . -
. . , -

. .
, : 6 -
- , 6
, 5 5 .
. -

-. -

. ?
?
, -
? , -
, - -
.
-
? -, move -
-
to Move to the right, please. Move on the right
,
. -, move
,
. -, party
, ,
, .
? Keep to the right.

73

"Is a Puzzlement"
Lynn Visson
That awkward and ungrammatical phrase
is a puzzlement has remained engraved in my
mind since the first time I saw the musical The
King and I in New York many years ago.
(Frankly, it sounded very much like the kind of
thing my father might have said, all the more so
since both he and Yul Brynner, the actor playing
the King of Siam, were native speakers of
Russian.) Alone on the stage, the King muses
aloud that is a puzzlement why the arrival of
his childrens English governess has led to the
upheavals and moral breakdown now plaguing
his court. Annoyed and angry, he persistently
mangles the governesss native language. Yet she
keeps on patiently and politely correcting him,
for she realizes that King Chulalongkorns
mistakes in English are the result of his countrys
centuries of isolation from Western civilization.
But today what is an educated American or
Englishman to do when a foreigner with a fairly
mediocre command of English takes it upon
himself to correct a native speakers use of
English? Grin and bear it? Argue? These are
questions that have haunted me since
childhood. My parents, who were part of the
first wave of Russian emigres who left during
the years preceding and following the 1917
revolution, first lived in Sweden, Denmark and
Germany, then settled down in France, and in
1941 were forced to move once again, this time
to America. When I arrived on the scene shortly
afterwards, my parents, like most of their
friends and contemporaries, took it for granted
that any child would do what they had had to
do, i.e., become fluent in four languages by the
74
age of five. As a result, I was raised speaking
Russian, French and German. The
surrounding environment, however, ensured
that English was my native language.
In addition to their native Russian, my
parents had an excellent command of French
and German. By the time I was 12, though, I
was the resident expert on any questions
involving the proper use of English. I rather
enjoyed the role of English arbiter in return for
all the times I had to turn to them regarding the
mysteries of Russian and French. That
understanding concerning the unquestioned
division of linguistic expertise was a given in our
family. And the tradition kept on going. In the
1970s my father wrote his memoirs of his years
as Director of Exhibitions at New Yorks
Wildenstein Gallery, and since his written
English was not on the level of his spoken
English, he was counting on my editing the
book. Following his death shortly after
completing the manuscript, I reworked the
text, which was subsequently published in the
US and in Russia.
My knowledge of Russian, however, was
uneven. The fact that I never attended school in
Russia made itself felt whenever it came to
putting pen to paper, or Cyrillic text to a PC.
Though I am relatively confident of my ability
as a nearly bilingual cow to moo in Russian till
my fellow bovines come home, to this day I am
careful to submit all my writings in Russian
intended for publication to the watchful eye of
a native speaker who is either an academic
colleague or a professional editor.

On the other hand, some 40 years devoted
to studying and working with Russian language
and culture, and ongoing contacts with Russian
colleagues and friends in both the US and the
country of my roots have helped to bridge the
gap between my written and spoken Russian. A
decade of teaching the language and literature
in American universities, 24 years at the United
Nations interpreting from Russian and French
into English (and occasionally from English
into Russian), years of travel to Russia to
lecture and teach translation and interpretation
in Russian, and speaking Russian day in and
day out with my husband, a Moscow
intellectual who left the USSR some 30 years
ago, have served to make me, for practical
purposes, bilingual. I maintain ongoing e-mail
correspondence in Russian with numerous
colleagues and friends, and though I
occasionally notice a grammatical slipup in the
letters of even highly literate and educated
native speakers of Russian, it would never occur
to me to flag such an error to the writer, or to
correct someone to prove to him that he is
wrong. On the other hand, all my friends
know that I am always grateful for correction of
an infelicity in my Russian.
Like my US colleagues who are engaged in
interpreting and translating from Russian, I am
acutely aware that the history of Russia has
created a distinctive attitude among Russians
both to their own language and to foreign
tongues. Only those individuals who are either
stone deaf or totally devoid of the slightest
linguistic and cultural sensitivity can fail to
notice the fierce and passionate love and
devotion of Russians for their ,
, . This is a old-fashioned and nearly archaic British
language which has survived the hailstorm of
foreign (including German and Dutch) terms
that first battered their way into Russian during
the reign of Peter the Great, to be followed by
the relentless march of French terms that
accompanied the Napoleonic troops and the
diction of Pushkin and his nineteenth-century
contemporaries, and ultimately by the verbal
Klondike of perestroika, which unlocked the
linguistic gates to a flood of English
management, banking, business, computer,
slang and other terms which set up permanent
outposts in all areas of the Russian language.
1 (21) 2009 Lynn Visson
The Russian mass media has and with good
reason been bursting with angry reactions of
readers, writers and viewers fulminating against
the linguistic devastation wrought by this
invasion of Anglophone terminology, ranging
from to to -.
No need for a host of examples; we are all
familiar with them. The modern protective
Slavophile reaction to this Westernizing
rampage by the English language is thoroughly
understandable.
There is, however, a major distinction in
the attitude towards these two languages in the
US and in Russia. In the United States,
Russian has been taught for years in schools
and universities, first by pre-war immigrants,
later by the waves of emigres who arrived
following World War II and in the 1970s, as well
as by several generations of US Slavists who
devoted themselves to the study of the
language. For decades, therefore, Americans
had the opportunity to study Russian with
native speakers, while most Russians were
learning English from other Russians. The
Russian emigres in the United States were
keeping up with their native language, and with
changes in that language, while the English of
the Soviet Union was frozen in a time warp.
To use a favorite Sovietism, it is well known
to everyone that the USSR was a closed society,
and that native speakers of Western languages
who could serve as teachers and language editors
were few and far between. Russian English-
language textbooks and linguistic materials
tended to be ideologically biased; Russian-born
teachers of English unconcernedly transmitted
expressions to students who passed them on to
their students. For many Russian students,
moreover, the British dialect was and still is the
only acceptable version of the English language.
The few native English-language editors,
primarily aging American, Canadian and British
Communists working in English-language
newspapers such as the Moscow News or Progress
Publishers, were at the mercy of Soviet editors
who placed ideology over language and insisted
on the goal-directed steps and radiant
future characteristic of Marxist jargon.
75

Yet and this is important in seeking an
1 (21) 2009 Lynn Visson
answer to the puzzlement during those
same decades in which dusty, arcane English
was being handed down in Russian schools and
colleges, the country saw a flowering of
superbly qualified English-Russian translators,
who both did outstanding theoretical work and
provided brilliant renderings into Russian of
world classics. The poetry of Burns as
translated by Marshak, Shakespeare through
the lens of Pasternak, or Salingers Catcher in
the Rye as transformed by Rita Rait-Kovaleva,
are classics of the art; many English-language
translations of the Russian classics pale in
comparison. The architecture and art of
translation as practiced in Soviet Russia raised
the bar to a level that was admired by translators
worldwide. There was a very good reason for
this; in an era where a joke told to the wrong
person could lead to a twenty-year prison
sentence or worse, translation was an
ideologically safe haven. As compared to many
other activities, translating classical Greek or
Roman, or even nineteenth-century English
poetry, was relatively innocuous.
While translators were penning their way to
creative heights, interpreters were struggling. In
addition to the shortage of native speakers
capable of teaching and writing good English
there was a near-total dearth of native speakers
of English capable of interpreting, let alone of
doing simultaneous interpretation. As a result,
Russian-born interpreters were obliged to
interpret both from English into Russian and
Russian into English. Practice worked its way
backward into theory. While in the West and
in particular in international organizations
such as the UN interpretation for the most
part was done from the foreign into the native
language, Russian theoreticians touted the
benefits of interpretation from the native into
the foreign language. The de facto shortage led
to theoretical underpinnings for the
assumption that native into foreign is better,
though anyone who has ever had to listen to a
non-native speaker of English struggle to
interpret from his or her native language into a
foreign language is most unlikely to agree. As a
result of being forced to work from Russian into
English, many Russian interpreters accepted
76
the notion that this was a good thing, and in
fact a very good thing. The next logical and
pragmatic though rather dubious step was
to posit that Russian interpreters (i.e., native
speakers of Russian) could do a better job than
native speakers of English in interpreting from
Russian into English.
There have, of course, been exceptions to
the into native is better rule, in the form of
some brilliant and virtually bilingual Russian
(and a few US) interpreters who could work
into both languages. Oleg Troyanovsky, Viktor
Sukhodrev, Boris Belitsky, Yurii Klebnikov and
Bill Krimer were a few of these stars of the
interpretation world.
The closed nature of Soviet society and the
desperate need for individuals with an excellent
knowledge of English spurred Russian
teachers, editors, translators and interpreters to
perfect their English-language skills and
doggedly cling to their chosen profession. No
wonder they valued it so highly. This was their
passport to excellent jobs, trips abroad, the
chance to purchase foreign goods, read
literature in English and legitimately engage in
contacts with foreigners. Even when the society
opened up, this attitude remained. Many of
those who had clambered up to the peak of the
English-language establishment firmly dug in
their heels and refused to descend from those
heights or to allow native English speakers to
join them there. These foreigners were
trespassers, and that Russian monopoly on
English was not going to cede its position lightly.
Perestroika unquestionably gave a major and
irreversible jolt to the Russian English-language
teaching and translation-interpretation elite.
Foreign language-teaching books began to be
published in Russia. Native English speakers
were hired as teachers and editors (along with a
very few translators and interpreters, who could
hardly service the entire countrys needs), and
Russian specialists in English found it vastly
easier to go abroad for training and maintenance
of their language skills.
Nevertheless, the effect of decades of
isolation has left a strong stamp on Russian
speakers of English. Years of studying English
with teachers who had no contact with native
speakers of English, and of learning from the

ideologically sanitized world of outdated opinion and I have mine. That attitude seems

1 (21) 2009 Lynn Visson

textbooks did not provide students with a
knowledge of contemporary English usage.
Language is far from static; it is constantly
developing and changing. Usage changes as we
speak. A little learning, said the 18th-century
English writer Alexander Pope, is a dangerous
thing, and even some knowledge can be
equally shaky. An individual completely
ignorant of foreign languages is aware of the
gaps in his knowledge, and may well look up to
those who have mastered one or several tongues.
But a , someone with little or of their native language.
some knowledge, may have a highly
exaggerated view of his mastery of a language.
presents particular dangers that of the Moscow film editor who busied
for an interpreter working from a native into a
foreign language. Regardless of what knowing
a language means, and what knowing
Russian or knowing English actually
involves, one thing is crystal clear: under the
pressure of the booth, the grammar, syntax and
style of a simultaneous interpreter working into
a non-native language rapidly disintegrate. A
Russian who has excellent mastery of the
English tense system may still have trouble with
articles, syntax and style, and particularly with
register. How can he also have an all-
encompassing knowledge of the endless rules
for proper punctuation, capitalization, letter
and resume-writing? Of exclamations and
interjections and acceptable and non-
acceptable curse words? Only long-term
exposure to the linguistic milieu can lead to
true comfort with such issues, and with register.
To phrase the argument in Chomskyan terms, a
non-native speaker of the language, no matter
how sophisticated his theoretical knowledge of
grammar, will not be able to generate the same
kinds of sentences as a native speaker. And a
Whorfian would assert that a native speaker of
Russian cannot have the cultural worldview
determined by the English language. Nor will
he be familiar with all the associations that
English words and phrases bring to mind for a
Briton or an American.
A Russian can very easily turn ongoing immersion in an English-speaking
into a , categorically asserting milieu usually fairly quickly convinces emigres
, as opposed to the that the locals have a solid grounding in their
American tendency to say, Well, you have your
to apply to notions concerning mastery of a
language as well as to a host of other subjects.
To go still further into the realm of national
stereotypes and fixed ideas, the old-style
for foreigners the reverse side of
the coin of the old Soviet superiority-inferiority
complex/love-hate relationship with the West,
which posited that anything Western was highly
desirable, while at the same time
sometimes seems to have spilled over
into a for the foreigners knowledge
Perhaps the most mind-boggling example
of linguistic arrogance I have heard about was
himself correcting the English subtitles an
American friend of mine had done for a
Russian movie. When she objected to one of his
changes (which was, in fact, a blatant
mistranslation) and reminded him that she was
a native speaker of English, he retorted that,
, .
Here we return to the puzzlement.
Throughout years of contacts with Russian
native speakers who work as teachers, editors,
translators and interpreters of English, dozens
of my US colleagues and I have repeatedly
encountered a thinly veiled attitude of I know
English better than you do, or, to tweak the
words of Pete Seegers song, This language is
my language it isnt your language. I repeat:
neither I nor the overwhelming majority of my
US colleagues who have not been educated in
Russia regardless of our fluency in the
language would ever venture to publish a
piece in Russian that had not been carefully
vetted by a native speaker of the language, a
professional editor or an academic. Yet time
and again I have seen native speakers of
Russian blithely publish articles, abstracts, and
even entire books without feeling the slightest
need to submit them for review to a native
speaker of English. In all fairness, this behavior
seems far more characteristic of people living in
Russia than of those living in the US, since
native English and do in fact know what they
are talking about.

77

A few months ago native English speakers
1 (21) 2009 Lynn Visson
working at the English-language The Moscow
Times were told that some of the awkward
phrasing in the English texts of Russian authors
reflected distinctive features of their specific
style and was not to be corrected. Thats for a
start. I wish these had been isolated incidents,
but far from it. A recent issue of an academic
journal published by a major Russian
educational institution had a page of English
titles of articles spiked with grammatical and
spelling errors. When I pointed this out to the
editor, he was incredulous. That cant be, he
remonstrated. These were translated by one of
our English teachers. Point made. I had
questioned the Popes command of Latin.
I am not about to trot out the old hackneyed
argument that the native speaker is always
correct. Native speakers, as we all know, can
make mistakes both in speaking and in writing
their native languages. There are linguistic slips,
changes in usage, incorrect usages. Two eagle-
eyed Russian editors and proofreaders have
found various typos and slipups in various
English texts of my books and articles, and I am
most grateful to them for that. As a member of
the editorial board of a Moscow journal, I have
on occasion called the editors attention to
various spelling and grammatical errors in the
Russian texts of articles submitted for
publication, and have caught a Russian editor
using the wrong declensional form for a
numeral. But I also have had to stand firm to
keep 20th-century standard English phrases
from being corrected by zealous Russian
editors into Dickensian English parlance. How
would a Russian speaker feel if his modern
Russian prose were corrected by an English
speaker to sound like Sumarokov? In the
overwhelming majority of cases, though, the
native speaker serves as both the standard and
the judge of correct usage.
I recently translated a book by a
distinguished Russian historian. Due to his
highly limited knowledge of English, our entire
correspondence and all our telephone
conversations were conducted exclusively in
Russian. The learned gentleman, (who in fact
had been living in the US for quite a few years
and is one of the rather few examples of such a
78
Russian who has remained relatively immune
to the surrounding linguistic milieu) did not
hesitate to correct my translation of the late
Mrs. Smirnova to the passed over Mrs.
Smirnova, and the advice of Dr. Ivanov to
the advices of Ivanovs. Only the solemn
promise practically an oath extracted from
the author by our editor to the effect that there
would be no more such corrections allowed
me to finish work on the manuscript.
While working with another Russian author
on the English text of his article, which was
filled with incorrect English usage, I was
constantly informed that all these forms were
in the dictionary (which dictionary?) and were
therefore by definition correct. Never mind that
dictionary forms a) may be outdated and b)
must be used correctly and in the appropriate
linguistic-cultural context. That was fairly
irrelevant, though, since, of course, he knew
English better than I did. That was a given.
Things are not much better for interpreters.
Some of the Russian delegates at international
meetings are devoted aficionados of the sport of
catch the interpreter. This game is played by
monitoring every syllable uttered by the English-
language interpreter and making as many
corrections as possible. Of course, any
interpreter with whatever language
combination can make a mistake. There is no
such animal as an infallible interpreter, and a
delegate has every right to correct a real mistake.
But this requires that the Russian delegate
possess an excellent knowledge of the language
into which the interpreter is working. An
American interpreter was once interpreting a
delegate who kept using the word .
Tired of repeating fears and apprehensions,
the interpreter referred to misgivings. After a
moment of deathly stillness during which the
interpreter (as so often happens) waited with
thumping heart for the axe to fall the delegate
proudly announced, Is mistake in the
interpretation. We are not giving anything away.
What delegate wants, delegate gets.
Russian delegates who insist on English
cognates as translations for words such as
or are in fact
obliging the native speaker of English to come
out with incorrect renderings. Moreover, an

English translation of a Russian text given to an
English-language interpreter and marked
"Read as written" can put the interpreter in the
awkward position of saying some very odd
things. How does a listener react on hearing a
native speaker of English speaking thoroughly
non-native English? How would a Russian-
language interpreter react on being handed a
Russian text with mangled verb aspects,
jumbled case endings and preposition salad?
correct the English of a native speaker of
, or When in Rome, do as the Romans
do are proverbs common to many cultures.
And when in America, do as the English
speakers do, without imposing a
. Never mind the basic tenets of common
courtesy in cross-cultural communication;
denying the obvious fact that a simultaneous
interpreters knowledge of his native language
is superior to that of a non-native speaker is
both fraught with serious implications for
linguistic communication and can lead to
serious misunderstandings in international
relations. I have no quarrel with a Russian
interpreter who wishes to correct a native
English-speaking colleague who has genuinely
misunderstood the Russian original. And I am
fully aware that todays commercial market
often requires native Russian interpreters to
work both ways at a meeting, i.e., from
English into Russian and from Russian into
English, and to do the best possible job in this
situation. But I cannot accept the illogical
conclusion of some of these monitors and
one with far-reaching consequences that
native Anglophone interpreters are simply
unnecessary and can easily be replaced by
native speakers of Russian.
So I would plead for some restraint on both
sides. Many Russian professionals, editors,
translators and interpreters have attained an
extraordinary mastery of English, and post-
perestroika Russian students of English have
made phenomenal progress. In fact, many
Russian students of English have long had a
theoretical grasp of English grammatical
structures that is considerably better than that of
quite a few native speakers of English, and many
American students of Russian have a better grasp
than native Russian speakers of the subtleties of
the rules of Russian grammar. That is natural,
1 (21) 2009 Lynn Visson
since the native speaker does not need to give
constant thought to grammatical rules.
But no American student of Russian would
then take it upon himself to go about correcting
the Russian oral or written of a native
speaker. He would be considered by his
American colleagues as just short of clinically
insane. Nor would a native speaker of French,
Spanish or German take it upon himself to
English. English-speaking Western Europeans
have been in contact with native speakers of
English for far longer than most Russians, and
tend to have a much more accurate idea of what
is actually involved in mastering the language.
English has emerged as a global language,
and its study in todays Russia is widespread.
Unfortunately, not all Russian speakers
understand that the claim to know English
better than a native Anglophone and correction
of his English (to use a completely
inappropriate metaphor) makes the English
speaker see red. Ones language is a part of
ones cultural identity, and these bounds and
borders must be respected.
There are some thoughtful voices with
whom it is possible to dialogue on this issue of
Russian English, but unfortunately these still
seem to be in a definite minority. That is why I
have decided to take this issue out into the open
and stop skulking around wrapped in the shawl
of linguistic politesse. Sorry,
. While I'm always glad to help Russians
who are studying and working with English,
this language is my language; it isnt your
language. I would hope that one day we will be
at the point when both Russian and English will
be our languages, when the English language
will no longer be the fiefdom of the Russian
English-language elite, with native speakers
relegated to the linguistic bleachers. And that
then native Russian English teachers, editors,
translators and interpreters will cooperate with
their American English-speaking counterparts
to produce the best possible English-language
product. But work on that has to start now. As
the new American President has been saying,
Time for a change.
79


,
..

, -
-, - -
. . -
- , -

,
, - , , -
- , , -
. - . -
: , , ,
- ,
, , - , ! -
, -
, ,
- . -
. , , -
, , , :
. - ,
, , -
, , - - -
, . , :
, - .
, -
( , ), , .
, 2030 - , , -
-
,
. . -
, , ,
played it by the ear (
. ..).
, . , , , -
? , , -
. , , - . , ,
: , , , ,
: !
,
.

80

, NN, ; -

1 (21) 2009 ..
- ;
, -
, - . -
, -
-
,
? .
... - -
,
- . - -
, , -
, , - -
.
, - -
, -
, : - , -
. .
, - , , -
, ... - !
! ,
, : - .
, ,
- , -
. : -
, , ,
. ,
- , -
, : , . , -
, ;
, - - , -
..., - , -
, . , ,
. , - , ,
9 8 , - - -
, . - , ...
, , ,
, , , -
- - , .
? , , , ,
, , ,
. , , , ,
, , , ,
. , -
- , , ,
: . ,
. , - ,
. , -
, - ,
,
. , - .
,
-

81

: burnout. - -
1 (21) 2009 ..

. , , . -
, , - , .
, , .
1970- .,
; - ,
, . , , -
, ,
. - ,
, - -, -
( , , , ,
, - , , -
, ), - , ,
. - , .
(. . ), .
-
Wikipedia, - ,
,
, -
? -
. ,
, ?
-
, -
,
,
; , -
.
. - ,
, -,
, , -
, - . -
, - .
, , , -
. - , -
, , , - ,
, - , -
, .
,
. -
, -
; - , ,
, , -
, - , .
, -
. . , , -
-
,
. - . , -
, -
( ,
, - - , -
, ). , 40, 50, 60 -
.

82

! , , -

1 (21) 2009 ..
, . ,
, - , -
. .
,
. - -
, -
. . -
, , ,
... -
:
,
, ,
, - . , -
. ,
(
, ) , .
, , ,
,
, - -
- ,
-- .
, -
. , ,
- ,
, , - .
: ,
,
, . ,
. - ,
, - .
, ,
, , .
- -
. , , -
,

, , .
, , : . -
, , -
- ,
, - , -
, ! ,
, (, ) -
? - . -
, , , , ,
,
,
. - , .
, - : . ,
: , -
, - . -
. Garbage in, garbage out. , ,

83

, ,
1 (21) 2009 ..

. , - , .
, - -
, -
.
, -
, -
. -
, -
- , -
: ? ? -
, , - ,
, - ,
- ...
, - , !
.

, . ,
, ,
.
, .

, ?

:

- . -
. - , , ,
, - - ? -
, , ,
, . - .
. , -
- , :
, - ?
2014 . , :
,
, - .
,
. : ,
-. . -
, - , ,
! , - : , ,
(
, , -80. , ) (
-
: How do you do, comrades!. - ).
, , . -
. ,
, , ,
2014 , , . . , - .
.
(, 29, 2007)

84